So, here is my thinking on NATO membership...

[Joe Nation]

Screw Turkey. They have always seemed like an odd choice for a NATO member hardly aligned with western democracies anyway. Even now, they seem to want to only think about what they can get out of this crisis in Ukraine rather than looking at strengthening NATO overall. They have always been more friendly to Russia than western countries to the point that they often defend Russia.

We offer Turkey this deal. NATO accepts the Nordic counties and Switzerland if they ask and if Turkey decides that they can't accept that, bye bye Turkey. Let them go it alone.

So, what does it take to cleave off a country from NATO? Not sure I remember it ever happening but maybe it's time to find out.

[Bev54]

1. So now Croatia is also mouthing off about not accepting them into NATO

[Walleye]

2. Erdogon is the Joe Manchin of NATO

[Jake97]

3. Turkey controls access to the Black Sea

[gopiscrap]

13. welcome to DU

[Joenobody]

4. Pretty silly

Turkey is strategically irreplaceable to the US. That's why we put up with them.

[Joe Nation]

6. What's more strategic to the current situation than the Baltic countries?

I mean, the entire Baltic region is on Moscow's front porch.

[relayerbob]

9. The situation on the southern front is much more critical

That gives Russia access to warm water ports and access to the Middle East and Africa. There are very good reasons that NATO focussed on getting Turkey to join in 1952 and deployed nuclear weapons there.

[Joenobody]

10. Turkey is more important strategically

And it's not close, even in a war with Russia it would be more important to control the southern flank and access in and out of the Black Sea than to add another nordic nation that would be an ally regardless . NATO already has borders closer to Moscow than any place in Finland.

[RainCaster]

5. If Turkey wants US weapons, they need to allow every new NATO member

We can & should make all our weapons conditional on this. If they really want to buy Russian weapons instead, let them. Look how well they worked for Russia.

[Joe Nation]

7. Excellent point

And they need us as allies.

[relayerbob]

8. Very bad move

Turkey controls access to the Black Sea, as well as provides MidEast bases for the USAF and others. They have been in NATO since 1952, through multiple changes in leadership. They are also supplying Ukraine with alot of support and weaponry. To say nothing of handing Turkey to the Russians on a silver platter, or worse yet, setting them off rogue like Iran. And no, they have been "always been more friendly to Russia than Western countries." Not by any means. Also, they have the technology to build nuclear weapons and delivery systems. They go rogue, they could have nukes in only a few years.

Biting one's nose off to spite the face, never works out well. They are trying to manueuver to get weapons sanctions relieved and to deal with the Kurds on their terms. HOw we deal with those issues is another subject, but bumping them off to get Finland and Sweden into NATO would be a horrible geopolitical and strategic mistake. Fortuantely, no one is considering that.

Croatia is another story altogether. Losing them would have little material effect, although they have been staunch suporters of Ukraine.

[ripcord]

11. So should France and Germany be kicked for blocking Ukraine's membership?

[moondust]

12. Or maybe

consider lowering the bar from "unanimous" to "supermajority." The world today with social media, etc., can more easily become fragmented and radicalized than when NATO was formed.

Isn't Hungary/Orban the other problem?